Optimal haloperidol dosage in first-episode psychosis

Dosing antipsychotics in special populations of patients with schizophrenia: severe psychotic agitation, first psychotic episode and elderly patients

Antipsychotic (AP) dosing is well established in nonelderly patients with acute exacerbations of schizophrenia, but not in special populations.This review describes the AP dosing procedures that have been used in clinical studies for acute psychotic agitation, a first episode of psychosis (FEP), and elderly patients. AP dosing data was extracted from the databases of drug regulatory authorities, and from clinical studies available in the medical literature. In acute psychotic agitation, intramuscular and oral APs are frequently prescribed in higher doses than those that saturate D2 receptors. Supersaturating doses of APs should be avoided due to an increased risk of adverse effects. In FEP, many studies showed efficacy of low doses of APs. Studies with risperidone and haloperidol suggested a dose reduction of approximately one third. Titration with a lower starting dose is recommended in elderly patients, due to possible decreases in pharmacokinetic clearance, and due to the risk of concomitant diseases and drug interactions. Exposure to some APs has been associated with QTc prolongation and arrhythmias, and a small but significant increase in the risk of stroke and mortality with APs has been seen, particularly in older people with dementia-related psychosis.

Rational pharmacotherapy in early psychosis

Background

An increased focus in research specific to first-episode schizophrenia has provided a rapidly growing body of evidence that can be directly translated to clinical practice.

Aims

To provide clinical recommendations specific to effective pharmacotherapy of first-episode schizophrenia.

Method

Evidence from clinical trials focused on the first-episode population is combined with data from other areas of investigation.

Results

In first-episode psychosis, when to initiate treatment is not always clear, being intimately linked to challenges regarding early detection and diagnosis. There may be differences in antipsychotic dosing, patterns of response and sensitivity to side-effects. Adherence appears to be even more problematic at this stage.

Conclusions

Clinicians currently treating early psychosis have considerably more information to guide their decision-making. However, the speed at which the field is growing is a reminder totreatthis knowledge as a work in progress.

Drug treatments for schizophrenia: pragmatism in trial design shows lack of progress in drug design

Aims. The introduction of second generation antipsychotic (SGA) medication over a decade ago led to changes in prescribing practices; these drugs have eclipsed their predecessors as treatments for schizophrenia. However, the metabolic side effects of these newer antipsychotics have been marked and there are increasing concerns as to whether these novel drugs really are superior to their predecessors in terms of the balance between risks and benefits. In this article, we review the literature regarding comparisons between first generation antipsychotic (FGA) and SGA in terms of clinical effectiveness. Methods. Large (n > 150) randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness (efficacy and side effects) of FGA and SGA medications other than clozapine were reviewed, as were meta-analyses that included smaller studies. Results. The superiority in efficacy and reduced extrapyramidal side effects (EPSE) of SGAs is modest, especially when compared with low-dose FGAs. However, the high risk of weight gain and other metabolic disturbances associated with certain SGAs such as olanzapine is markedly higher than the risk with FGAs at the doses used in the trials. Conclusions. The efficacy profiles of various FGAs and SGAs are relatively similar, but their side effects vary between and within classes. Overall, large pragmatic trials of clinical effectiveness indicate that the care used in prescribing and managing drug treatments to ensure tolerability may be more important than the class of drug used.

Early intervention for psychosis

BACKGROUND

Proponents of early intervention have argued that outcomes might be improved if more therapeutic efforts were focused on the early stages of schizophrenia or on people with prodromal symptoms. Early intervention in schizophrenia has two elements that are distinct from standard care: early detection, and phase-specific treatment (phase-specific treatment is a psychological, social or physical treatment developed, or modified, specifically for use with people at an early stage of the illness).Early detection and phase-specific treatment may both be offered as supplements to standard care, or may be provided through a specialised early intervention team. Early intervention is now well established as a therapeutic approach in America, Europe and Australasia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of: (a) early detection; (b) phase-specific treatments; and (c) specialised early intervention teams in the treatment of people with prodromal symptoms or first-episode psychosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (March 2009), inspected reference lists of all identified trials and reviews and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) designed to prevent progression to psychosis in people showing prodromal symptoms, or to improve outcome for people with first-episode psychosis. Eligible interventions, alone and in combination, included: early detection, phase-specific treatments, and care from specialised early intervention teams. We accepted cluster-randomised trials but excluded non-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected studies, quality rated them and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated relative risks (RR), with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we calculated the number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H) and used intention-to-treat analysis (ITT).

MAIN RESULTS

Studies were diverse, mostly small, undertaken by pioneering researchers and with many methodological limitations (18 RCTs, total n=1808). Mostly, meta-analyses were inappropriate. For the six studies addressing prevention of psychosis for people with prodromal symptoms, olanzapine seemed of little benefit (n=60, 1 RCT, RR conversion to psychosis 0.58 CI 0.3 to 1.2), and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) equally so (n=60, 1 RCT, RR conversion to psychosis 0.50 CI 0.2 to 1.7). A risperidone plus CBT plus specialised team did have benefit over specialist team alone at six months (n=59, 1 RCT, RR conversion to psychosis 0.27 CI 0.1 to 0.9, NNT 4 CI 2 to 20), but this was not seen by 12 months (n=59, 1 RCT, RR 0.54 CI 0.2 to 1.3). Omega 3 fatty acids (EPA) had advantage over placebo (n=76, 1 RCT, RR transition to psychosis 0.13 CI 0.02 to 1.0, NNT 6 CI 5 to 96). We know of no replications of this finding.The remaining trials aimed to improve outcome in first-episode psychosis. Phase-specific CBT for suicidality seemed to have little effect, but the single study was small (n=56, 1 RCT, RR suicide 0.81 CI 0.05 to 12.26). Family therapy plus a specialised team in the Netherlands did not clearly affect relapse (n=76, RR 1.05 CI 0.4 to 3.0), but without the specialised team in China it may (n=83, 1 RCT, RR admitted to hospital 0.28 CI 0.1 to 0.6, NNT 3 CI 2 to 6). The largest and highest quality study compared specialised team with standard care. Leaving the study early was reduced (n=547, 1 RCT, RR 0.59 CI 0.4 to 0.8, NNT 9 CI 6 to 18) and compliance with treatment improved (n=507, RR stopped treatment 0.20 CI 0.1 to 0.4, NNT 9 CI 8 to 12). The mean number of days spent in hospital at one year were not significantly different (n=507, WMD, -1.39 CI -2.8 to 0.1), neither were data for 'Not hospitalised' by five years (n=547, RR 1.05 CI 0.90 to 1.2). There were no significant differences in numbers 'not living independently' by one year (n=507, RR 0.55 CI 0.3 to 1.2). At five years significantly fewer participants in the treatment group were 'not living independently' (n=547, RR 0.42 CI 0.21 to 0.8, NNT 19 CI 14 to 62). When phase-specific treatment (CBT) was compared with befriending no significant differences emerged in the number of participants being hospitalised over the 12 months (n=62, 1 RCT, RR 1.08 CI 0.59 to 1.99).Phase-specific treatment E-EPA oils suggested no benefit (n=80, 1 RCT, RR no response 0.90 CI 0.6 to 1.4) as did phase-specific treatment brief intervention (n=106, 1 RCT, RR admission 0.86 CI 0.4 to 1.7). Phase-specific ACE found no benefit but participants given vocational intervention were more likely to be employed (n=41, 1 RCT, RR 0.39 CI 0.21 to 0.7, NNT 2 CI 2 to 4). Phase-specific cannabis and psychosis therapy did not show benefit (n=47, RR cannabis use 1.30 CI 0.8 to 2.2) and crisis assessment did not reduce hospitalisation (n=98, RR 0.85 CI 0.6 to 1.3). Weight was unaffected by early behavioural intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is emerging, but as yet inconclusive evidence, to suggest that people in the prodrome of psychosis can be helped by some interventions. There is some support for specialised early intervention services, but further trials would be desirable, and there is a question of whether gains are maintained. There is some support for phase-specific treatment focused on employment and family therapy, but again, this needs replicating with larger and longer trials.

Very low-dose risperidone in first-episode psychosis: a safe and effective way to initiate treatment

Patients experiencing a first psychotic episode have high rates of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPSs) when treated with the doses of neuroleptics used in multiepisode or chronic schizophrenia. There is some evidence that lower doses may be equally, if not more, effective but less toxic in this population. Here, we report the results of a biphasic open label trial designed to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of low-dose (2-4 mg/day) risperidone treatment in a group of 96 first-episode nonaffective psychosis patients. At the end of the trial, 62% of patients met the response criteria although approximately 80% had achieved a response at some time during the study. Reports of EPS remained low, and there were no dystonic reactions. We conclude that even at a dose of 2 mg/day, risperidone was highly effective in reducing acute symptomatology in a real world sample of young first-episode psychosis patients.

Short-term treatment with risperidone or haloperidol in first-episode schizophrenia: 8-week results of a randomized controlled trial within the German Research Network on Schizophrenia

Patients with first-episode schizophrenia appear to respond to lower doses of neuroleptics, and to be more sensitive to developing extrapyramidal side-effects. The authors therefore compared in such patients the efficacy and extrapyramidal tolerability of comparatively low dosages of the atypical neuroleptic risperidone and of the conventional neuroleptic haloperidol. Risperidone was hypothesized to have better extrapyramidal tolerability and efficacy in treating negative symptoms. Patients were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive risperidone (n=143) or haloperidol (n=146) for 8 wk. The primary efficacy criterion was the estimated difference in the mean change in the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) negative score between treatment groups; secondary efficacy criteria were changes on the PANSS total score and other PANSS subscores, and several other measures of psychopathology and general functioning. The primary tolerability criterion was the difference in baseline-adjusted occurrence rates of extrapyramidal side-effects measured with the Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS) compared between treatment groups. The main hypothesis was that risperidone would be superior in terms of improving negative symptoms and lowering the risk of extrapyramidal symptoms. Secondary tolerability criteria were the other extrapyramidal symptoms, measured with the Hillside Akathisia Scale (HAS) and the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS). The average mean daily doses were 3.8 mg (s.d.=1.5) for risperidone and 3.7 mg (s.d.=1.5) for haloperidol. There were similar, significant improvements in both treatment groups in the primary and secondary efficacy criteria. At week 8 nearly all scores of extrapyramidal side-effects indicated a significantly higher prevalence of extrapyramidal side-effects with haloperidol than with risperidone [SAS: risperidone 36.5% of patients; haloperidol 51.5% of patients; likelihood ratio test, chi2(1)=7.8, p=0.005]. There were significantly fewer drop-outs [risperidone n=55, drop-out rate=38.5%; haloperidol n=79, drop-out rate=54.1%, chi2(1)=7.1, p=0.009] and a longer non-discontinuation time [risperidone: average of 50.8 d to drop-out; haloperidol: average of 44.0 d to drop-out; log rank test, chi2(1)=6.4, p=0.011] in the risperidone group. Risperidone and haloperidol appear to be equally effective in treating negative and other symptoms of first-episode schizophrenia. Risperidone has better extrapyramidal tolerability and treatment retention rate than the equivalent dose of haloperidol in these patients.

PET and SPECT imaging in psychiatric disorders

OBJECTIVES

To review recent findings from positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) studies that investigate the pathophysiology and treatment of schizophrenia, depression, and dementia.

METHODS

We carried out a review of the literature.

RESULTS

PET and SPECT studies have provided evidence of dopamine system dysregulation in patients with schizophrenia and variable loss of monoamines in patients with depression. Antipsychotic response has been demonstrated to be associated with blockade of dopamine D2 receptors, and antidepressant response has now been linked to blockade of serotonin transporter receptors. PET and SPECT have been extensively evaluated as diagnostic procedures for dementia. Substantial progress has been made in developing radioligands that bind to amyloid deposits in the brain, which should provide new opportunities for early diagnosis and treatment monitoring in Alzheimer's disease.

CONCLUSION

Advances in PET and SPECT imaging have provided new insights into the biology of major psychiatric disorders and their treatment. In the future, we can expect that these imaging techniques will become more central to the management of psychiatric disorders.

Early intervention for psychosis

BACKGROUND

Proponents of early intervention have argued that outcome might be improved if more therapeutic efforts were focused on the early stages of schizophrenia or on people with prodromal symptoms. Early intervention in schizophrenia has two elements that are distinct from standard care: early detection and phase-specific treatment. Both elements may be offered as supplements to standard care, or may be provided through a specialised early intervention team. Early intervention is now well established as a therapeutic approach in America, Europe and Australasia, but it is unclear how far early detection, phase-specific treatments, and the use of early intervention teams are underpinned by evidence of effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of: (a) early detection; (b) phase-specific treatments; and (c) specialised early intervention teams in the treatment of people with prodromal symptoms or first episode psychosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CINAHL (1982-2002), The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (November 2001), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (July 2003), EMBASE (1980-2002), MEDLINE (1966-2002), PsycINFO (1967-2002), reference lists and contacted the European First Episode Network (2003). For the 2006 update we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials designed to prevent progression to psychosis in people showing prodromal symptoms, or to improve outcome for people with first episode psychosis. Eligible interventions, alone and in combination, included early detection, phase-specific treatments, and care from specialised early intervention teams. We accepted cluster-randomised trials but excluded non-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected studies, quality rated them and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated relative risks (RR), with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we calculated the number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H) and used intention-to-treat analysis (ITT).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies with a total of 941 participants. Six studies were small with numbers of participants ranging between 56 and 83, and one study randomised 547 people. None of the studies had similar interventions and therefore they were analysed separately. One small Australian trial (n=59) was concerned with a phase-specific intervention (low dose risperidone and cognitive behavioural therapy) for people with prodromal symptoms. This group were significantly less likely to develop psychosis at a six month follow up than people who only received care from a specialised team which did not involve phase-specific treatment (n=59, RR 0.27 CI 0.1 to 0.9, NNT 4 CI 2 to 20). This effect was not significant at 12 month follow up (n=59, 1 RCT, RR 0.54 CI 0.2 to 1.3). A UK-based study (EDIE) randomised 60 people with prodromal symptoms, to cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or a monitoring group. Only two outcomes were reported: leaving the study early and transition to psychosis, both sets of data were non-significant. A Chinese trial used a phase-specific intervention (family therapy) plus out patient care trial for people in their first episode of psychosis and found reduced admission rates care compared with those who received only outpatient care (n=83, RR 0.28 CI 0.1 to 0.6, NNT 3 CI 2 to 6). The applicability of this finding was, however, questionable. One Dutch study (n=76) comparing phase-specific intervention (family therapy) plus specialised team with specialised team for people in their first episode of schizophrenia found no difference between intervention and control groups at 12 months for the outcome of relapse (n=76, RR 1.05 CI 0.4 to 3.0). The large Scandinavian study (n=547) allocated people with first episode schizophrenia to integrated treatment (assertive community treatment plus family therapy, social skills training and a modified medication regime) or standard care. Global state outcome GAF significantly favoured integrated treatment (n=419, WMD -3.71 CI -6.7 to -0.7) by one year, but by two years data were non-significant. Rates of attrition were significantly lower (n=547, RR 0.59 CI 0.4 to 0.8, NNT 9 CI 6 to 18) for integrated treatment by one and two year follow-up. PRIME (USA) was the only double blind study and allocated people with prodromal symptoms to olanzapine or placebo. No significant differences were found between olanzapine and placebo in preventing conversion to psychosis by about 12 months (n=60, RR 0.58 CI 0.3 to 1.2). Clinical Global Impression change scores 'severity of illness' were equivocal by 12 months. Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS) scores were also equivocal and the PANSS, total, positive and negative outcomes were non-significant. There were no significant differences between the olanzapine and placebo group on adverse effects rating scales - SAS, BAS and AIMS scores; Weight gain was significantly higher in the olanzapine group (n=59, WMD 7.63 CI 4.0 to 11.2) by 12 months. Finally one more Australian study included people in their first episode of psychosis who were acutely suicidal and allocated people to phase-specific cognitively orientated therapy or standard care. Outcome data for leaving the study early and suicide were equivocal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified insufficient trials to draw any definitive conclusions. The substantial international interest in early intervention offers an opportunity to make major positive changes in psychiatric practice, but making the most of this opportunity requires a concerted international programme of research to address key unanswered questions.

Olanzapine and haloperidol in first episode psychosis: two-year data

Few studies have assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of atypical and typical antipsychotic medications in patients within their first episode of psychosis. This study examined the effectiveness of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine and the typical antipsychotic haloperidol in patients experiencing their first episode of a schizophrenia-related psychotic disorder over a 2-year treatment period. Two hundred and sixty-three patients were randomized to olanzapine or haloperidol in a doubleblind, multisite, international 2-year study. Clinical symptoms and side effects were assessed at baseline and longitudinally following randomization for the duration of the study. Olanzapine and haloperidol treatment were both associated with substantial and comparable reductions in symptom severity (the primary outcome measure) over the course of the study. However, the treatment groups differed on two secondary efficacy measures. Patients were less likely to discontinue treatment with olanzapine than with haloperidol: mean time (in days) in the study was significantly greater for those treated with olanzapine compared to haloperidol (322.09 vs. 230.38, p<0.0085). Moreover, remission rates were greater in patients treated with olanzapine as compared to those treated with haloperidol (57.25% vs. 43.94%, p<0.036). While extrapyramidal side effects were greater in those treated with haloperidol, weight gain, cholesterol level and liver function values were greater in patients treated with olanzapine. The data from this study suggest some clinical benefits for olanzapine as compared to haloperidol in first episode patients, which must be weighed against those adverse effects that are more likely with olanzapine.

Simplifying psychotropic medication regimen into a single night dosage and reducing the dose for patients with chronic schizophrenia

RATIONALE

Taking psychotropic medications is frequently problematic from both consumers' and caregivers' perspective. Occasionally missed doses may lead to pervasive non-adherence with relapse a likely outcome.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the simple medication regimen, all psychotropics were given at night for patients with chronic schizophrenia, who had been taking them at least twice a day for more than 12 weeks before the entry.

METHODS

Switching of agents took place in two ways: converting only antipsychotic medications followed by other psychotropics, and changing all psychotropics simultaneously. Any psychotropics of little clinical significance were then cautiously minimized. Final evaluation was made 12 weeks after the competed dose consolidation. Patients finally rated their subjective impression on this intervention.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were recruited in each treatment arm (50 in total). After switching, 11 got better, 29 remained stable whereas seven got worse, according to the Global Improvement. Three were not assessable. Overall, there were no relevant changes in clinical ratings including adverse effects. However, the chlorpromazine equivalent dose of antipsychotics and the number of total psychotropics were significantly reduced from 957 to 722 mg/day (p<0.0001) and from 4.0 to 3.2 (p<0.0001), respectively. Dose deflation of psychotropics was feasible in 35 subjects (74.5%). Twenty-six (of 40 successful) patients indicated that they favored the night-time regimen mainly because it was less complicated. Sedation in the morning was identified as an important adverse event, which should be addressed by reducing the dose.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedure may be of value to counteract a recent trend of psychotropic polypharmacy in schizophrenia.

The treatment of schizophrenia: from premorbid manifestations to the first episode of psychosis

To achieve the best therapeutic results in schizophrenia--like most other disorders--primary prevention is preferable to early and prompt treatment, which, in turn, is preferable to treatment of chronically established illness. Unfortunately, there currently exist no accurate markers that can provide information regarding the future course of illness and guide treatment in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic individuals. Therefore, most treatment efforts are currently focused on patients who have already experienced their first psychotic episode. This paper reviews the efforts to identify accurate markers heralding psychotic illness, as well as treatment considerations in the early phase of the disease.

Psychotic disorders clinic and first-episode psychosis: a program evaluation

BACKGROUND

There is growing recognition that people presenting with psychotic symptoms for the first time need specialized treatment. The Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation, McMaster Hospital, offers one such program, the Psychotic Disorders Clinic (PDC); it addresses some of the problems posed by long waiting lists, lack of family interventions, and long-term hospitalizations. The PDC is affiliated with the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences at McMaster University. The program's goals are to provide comprehensive outpatient care and early interventions for persons in the early stages of illness and, consequently, to improve symptom control and functioning and reduce hospitalizations. Key service components include providing low dosages of antipsychotics, offering specialized family education, and supporting return to school and work settings.

OBJECTIVES

This study compared outcomes before and after enrolment in the PDC to determine whether first-episode patients achieved improved symptom control and functioning and fewer hospitalizations.

METHOD

For a 12-month period, we followed 40 patients, aged between 16 and 45 years, who experienced their first episode of psychotic illness between 1997 and 2000. Prospective longitudinal data were collected at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Outcome measures included symptoms, global functioning, employment rates, duration of untreated psychosis, and number of bed-days.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 37 completed the study at 6 months, and 31 at 12 months. Over the 12 months, significant improvements occurred in psychiatric symptoms (P < 0.001), global functioning (P < 0.001), and the mean number of hospital bed-days (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible for small outpatient services to provide early intervention strategies and obtain good outcomes among first-episode patients.

The use of pharmacotherapy in the prodrome of schizophrenia

In treating schizophrenia there has been a shift in focus, with more attention being paid to early intervention based on the notion that effective treatment at this point can improve outcome. Most of this work has centred on pharmacotherapeutic interventions during the first psychotic break. More recently, attention has turned to the potential value of intervening even earlier, that is during the so-called "prodrome" that has been identified as predating the first psychotic break by as much as 4-5 years. We now have a limited number of published reports addressing this topic and these are reviewed here.

Subjective experience and dopamine D2 receptor occupancy in patients treated with antipsychotics: clinical implications

OBJECTIVES

This paper gives an overview of studies on the association between dopaminergic neurotransmission and the subjective experience of patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We undertook a review of the literature.

RESULTS

Dopaminergic neurotransmission may be relevant for subjective experience. Higher striatal D2 receptor occupancy by typical and atypical antipsychotics is related to worse subjective experience, more severe negative symptoms, and depression. Individuals with lower baseline dopamine function are at an increased risk for dysphoric responses during antipsychotic therapy with dopaminergic-blocking drugs. There is preliminary evidence that a window of striatal D2 receptor occupancy between 60% and 70% is optimal for the subjective experience of patients. These occupancies are often reached even with low dosages of antipsychotic drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Reaching an optimal dopamine D2 receptor occupancy is clinically relevant, since subjective experience associated with antipsychotic medication is related to medication compliance. Antipsychotic drug dosages often need to be lower than levels in common use.

Survey on schizophrenia treatment in Mexico: perception and antipsychotic prescription patterns

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of antipsychotics, especially the so called atypicals, the treatment of schizophrenia has shown important improvements. At the present time, it is preferred to label clozapine and other antipsychotics sharing similar profiles as second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). These medications have been proposed by some experts as a first line treatment for schizophrenia. It is critical to have reliable data about antipsychotic prescription in Mexico and to create management guidelines based on expert meetings and not only on studies carried out by the pharmaceutical industry. Only this approach will help to make the right decisions for the treatment of schizophrenia.

METHODS

A translated version of Rabinowitz's survey was used to evaluate antipsychotic prescription preferences and patterns in Mexican psychiatrists. The survey questionnaire was sent by mail to 200 psychiatrists from public institutions and private practice in Mexico City and Guadalajara, Mexico.

RESULTS

Recommendations for antipsychotics daily doses at different stages of the treatment of schizophrenia varied widely. Haloperidol was considered as the first choice for the treatment of positive symptoms. On the contrary, risperidone was the first option for negative symptoms. For a patient with a high susceptibility for developing extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), risperidone was the first choice. It was also considered that SGAs had advantages over typical antipsychotics in the management of negative symptoms, cognitive impairment and fewer EPS.Besides, there was a clear tendency for prescribing typical antipsychotics at higher doses than recommended and inadequate doses for the atypical ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Some of the obstacles for the prescription of SGAs include their high cost, deficient knowledge about their indications and dosage, the perception of their being less efficient for the treatment of positive symptoms and the resistance of some Mexican physicians to change their prescription pattern. It is necessary to reach a consensus, in order to establish and standardize the treatment of schizophrenia, based on the information reported in clinical trials and prevailing economic conditions in Mexico.

Early Intervention for psychosis

BACKGROUND

Proponents of early intervention have argued that outcome might be improved if more therapeutic effort were focused on the early stages of schizophrenia. Early intervention in schizophrenia has two elements that are distinct from standard care: early detection and phase-specific treatment. Both elements may be offered in addition to standard care, or may be provided by a specialised early intervention team. Early intervention is now well established as a therapeutic approach in America, Europe and Australasia, but it is unclear how far early detection, phase-specific treatments, and the use of early intervention teams are underpinned by evidence of effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to evaluate the effects of: i. early detection and treatment of people with prodromal symptoms; ii. the use of early intervention teams for people in their first episode of psychosis; and iii. phase-specific treatments for people in their first episode of psychosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CINAHL (1982-2002), The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (November 2001), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (July 2003), EMBASE (1980-2002), MEDLINE (1966-2002), PsycINFO (1967-2002), reference lists and contacted the European First Episode Network (2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials designed to prevent progression to psychosis in people showing prodromal symptoms, or improve outcome for people with first episode psychosis. Eligible interventions, alone and in combination, included early detection, phase-specific treatments, and care from specialised early intervention teams. Non-randomised trials would only have been included if they had been studies of the effects of early detection strategies in reducing the duration of untreated psychosis (since this issue cannot be addressed by simple randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two reviewers and cross-checked. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous data. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for continuous data.

MAIN RESULTS

In theory, seventeen different comparisons are possible, but the review only identified three studies that met inclusion criteria. One small trial (n=59) was concerned with a phase-specific intervention (low dose risperidone and cognitive behavioural therapy) for people with prodromal symptoms. This group were significantly less likely to develop psychosis at 6 month follow up than people who only received care from a specialised team which did not involve phase-specific treatment (n=59, 1 RCT, RR 0.27 CI 0.08 to 0.89, NNT 4 CI 2 to 20). This effect was not significant at 12 month follow up (n=59, 1 RCT, RR 0.54 CI 0.23 to 1.30). Another trial found that people in their first episode receiving a phase-specific intervention (family therapy) plus out patient care did have reduced admission rates care compared with those who received only outpatient care (n=83, 1 RCT, RR 0.28 CI 0.13 to 0.62, NNT 3 CI 2 to 6). The applicability of this finding was, however, questionable.Finally, one last study (n=76), comparing phase-specific intervention (family therapy) plus specialised team with specialised team for people in their first episode of schizophrenia found no difference between intervention and control groups at 12 months for the outcome of relapse but confidence intervals were wide (n=76, RR 1.06 CI 0.31 to 3.65).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified insufficient trials to draw any definitive conclusions, although five ongoing trials should report shortly. The substantial international interest in early intervention offers an opportunity to make major positive changes in psychiatric practice, but this opportunity may be missed without a concerted international programme of research to address key unanswered questions.

Pharmacotherapy of first-episode psychosis

Early intervention in psychosis has attracted more attention in the last few years. The treatment of this phase of the disorders requires a specific and adapted approach. The issue of engaging the patient is so critical that it influences not only the choice of medication, but also the context and the way in which it is administered. In the case of a first admission, patients should be observed for 24-48 h without any antipsychotic treatment, in order to clarify the diagnosis and exclude the possibility that symptoms are caused by acute intoxication with illicit substances, for example. The diagnosis is often difficult and unstable. A dimensional, rather than a categorical approach, is usually more likely to be adopted. In recent years, atypical antipsychotics have become the most frequently used first-line treatment. They are less likely to cause secondary negative symptoms, cognitive impairments and dysphoria. They also appear to influence the course of depression and hostility/aggression better than conventional neuroleptics, have possibly mood-stabilising properties and, subjectively, are often better accepted by patients. On the risk side, prevalence of acute extrapyramidal side effects and possibly tardive dyskinesia are lower, compared to the older neuroleptics. Although, the risk for short-term weight gain, cardiovascular, and especially hyperglycaemic complications are somewhat higher for some of these antipsychotics. Finally, the dose should be adapted as it has been shown that patients presenting a first psychotic episode respond to a lower dose of antipsychotic. This article focuses on the pharmacotherapy of first-episode psychosis, on the basis of a computerised and a manual search for articles dealing with antipsychotic treatment of these patients. Findings are discussed and combined in clinical guidelines for first-episode affective and non-affective psychosis, for patients with incomplete recovery or treatment resistance, for cases of emergency and for side effects associated with antipsychotic treatment.

Pharmacological Management of First-Episode Schizophrenia and Related Nonaffective Psychoses

Schizophrenia is a severe mental illness characterised by abnormalities of thought and perception that affects 1-2% of the population. Patients who experience a first episode of schizophrenia should be treated early and optimally with antipsychotic agents to lessen the morbidity of the initial episode and possibly improve the course of the illness. Positive psychotic symptoms remit in the majority of patients who are treated with adequate trials of antipsychotic medications, but most relapse within 1 year. Non-adherence is strongly related to the likelihood of recurrence of symptoms. Innovative programmes that integrate early intervention, psychosocial treatments and atypical antipsychotic pharmacotherapy show promise in improving outcomes. The available research supports the use of antipsychotic medications early in the first-episode of schizophrenia and for at least 1 year after remission of positive symptoms. Antidepressants, benzodiazepines and mood stabilisers have roles in the acute and maintenance phases of treatment for some patients. Atypical antipsychotics represent a great advance in the treatment of first-episode schizophrenia with strong evidence for greater tolerability with equal or better therapeutic efficacy. Future research will further define their roles in treatment and hopefully identify targets for prevention of first-episode schizophrenia.

Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trials

This review of recently published pharmaceutical industry-sponsored comparative psychotropic drug trials aims to classify apparent design and reporting modifications that favor the sponsor's product. The modifications have been grouped into 13 discrete categories, and representative examples of each are presented. Strong circumstantial evidence suggests that marketing goals led to these adjustments. The consequences of marketing influences on comparative psychopharmacology trials are discussed in terms of conflicts of interest, the integrity of the scientific literature, and costs to consumers, as well as their impact on physician practice.

Determining the optimal dose of haloperidol in first-episode psychosis

Uncertainty exists as to the most appropriate dose of haloperidol in first-episode psychosis. This study set out to determine whether ultra-low doses of haloperidol could successfully treat patients with first-episode psychosis. Thirty-five patients with a first episode of psychosis were treated with haloperidol in an open label, fixed protocol over a 12-week period with doses restricted to 1 mg per day for the first 4 weeks. Twenty-nine (83%) remained on haloperidol after 12 weeks at a mean dose of 1.78 mg per day, 16 (55%) had stabilized on 1 mg/day or less. The mean percentage reduction in Positive and Negative Symptom Scale score between baseline and 6 and 12 weeks was 30.3% (SD 20.9%) and 41.4% (SD 16.6%), respectively. There were no significant differences in mean extrapyramidal symptom ratings between baseline and 12 weeks. Ultra-low doses of haloperidol are effective and well tolerated in first-episode psychosis. Initial doses should be maintained for a sufficient period of time to allow for the medication to take full effect.

Differential efficacy of risperidone versus haloperidol in psychopathological subtypes of subchronic schizophrenia

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of risperidone versus haloperidol in subchronic schizophrenia, using psychopathological subgroups of patients with negative or positive and mixed symptoms to analyse the possible differential efficacy of the drugs. A total of 33 patients diagnosed using DSM-IV criteria entered the 6 week double-blind study with either risperidone or haloperidol 5 mg/day. Twenty-nine patients completed at least 2 weeks of treatment and entered the last observation carried-forward analysis. Both treatments were effective in reducing total scores and positive and negative subscale scores on the Positive and Negative Scale for Schizophrenia (PANSS), with a significantly better extrapyramidal profile in the risperidone-treated group. When analysis was repeated in each treatment group by psychopathological subtype (negative vs positive-mixed subgroups based on the PANSS composite index), risperidone was significantly superior to haloperidol in the intention to treat analysis in the negative subgroup. Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance showed a significantly greater improvement in the PANSS negative subscale scores of risperidone-treated patients in the negative subgroup and a significant improvement in the PANSS positive subscale scores in both psychopathological subtypes. Haloperidol was significantly effective only in reducing positive symptoms in the positive subtype. Our results indicate that risperidone may be proposed for first-line treatment of subchronic schizophrenia, in particular the negative subtype. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.